Skip to content

Why the browns suck once again.... what do they do

The Browns Board
41 18 1.4k
  • Totally reasonable way to see it Gip. But the real question still lies with how this weird FO sees it. What IS their plan?

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #23

    @texasag1969 said:

    Totally reasonable way to see it Gip. But the real question still lies with how this weird FO sees it. What IS their plan?

    Well, in theory their plan is to draft the best players they can get.

    But as we know from Browns drafts from Christmases past, the best laid plans aft gang aglay.

  • @orion said:

    umm...Joe Thomas is on the left side wearing #73. He's the guy who's man almost never gets to the QB on a passing play.

    Need to think about drafting his replacement now don't you think? Love JT but he ain't playing forever.

    OrionO Orion wrote on last edited by
    #24

    @miktoxic said:

    Need to think about drafting his replacement now don't you think? Love JT but he ain't playing forever.

    I've got no problem with that.

    His replacement can man the RT spot 'til it's time to step in for JT.

  • @hoorta said:

    Give it a rest. Joe Thomas isn't the reason our qbs are getting killed on a regular basis. It's lack of depth (for one thing- Bitonio getting hurt was a killer) and with Greko getting hurt, Griffin better up his life insurance policy. Now if you want to replace Erving- go to the head of the class. Us guys who actually watch what the line is doing have wanted him benched forever.

    And I should add this thought that just popped into my head. Opposing defenses don't even bother to attack Joe Thomas. Why should they? Of late, teams have just been putting a bum opposite Joe to keep him occupied, and attack anywhere and everywhere else.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by Tour2ma
    #25

    @hoorta said:

    And I should add this thought that just popped into my head. Opposing defenses don't even bother to attack Joe Thomas. Why should they? Of late, teams have just been putting a bum opposite Joe to keep him occupied, and attack anywhere and everywhere else.

    Clearly we need to start moving Joe around to keep Defenses guessing... 😮

  • B Babernakle wrote on last edited by
    #26

    Well there is no answer at qb in the draft the only guy out there is garoppolo and we have a good trading relationship with New England but the line needs addressed first and foremost otherwise there is no sense in getting a qb draft at center gaurd and tackle trade Thomas to the pats and a late round pick for garoppolo

  • Well there is no answer at qb in the draft the only guy out there is garoppolo and we have a good trading relationship with New England but the line needs addressed first and foremost otherwise there is no sense in getting a qb draft at center gaurd and tackle trade Thomas to the pats and a late round pick for garoppolo

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by
    #27

    @babernakle said:

    Well there is no answer at qb in the draft the only guy out there is garoppolo and we have a good trading relationship with New England but the line needs addressed first and foremost otherwise there is no sense in getting a qb draft at center gaurd and tackle trade Thomas to the pats and a late round pick for garoppolo

    Two reasons why not Jimmy G. Mallett and Cassell. How did those two work out when they went to other teams? Belichick isn't going to trade his QBOTF with a soon to be 40 year old Tom Brady manning the position. Trade Jimmy and keep Jacoby Brissett? Bill's smart enough to know Tom isn't going to be playing forever. Of course, if he can sucker some team into giving up a first round pick, I'm sure he'll listen.

    The only reason we got Collins from the Pats is they didn't want to (or couldn't) come up with enough cash to keep him happy. The Browns have more cap room (by far) than any other team in the NFL. Bill has rarely let someone go who went on to excel with another team.

    If you know anything at all about relative value to a team, left tackle (that's Joe) ranks only behind QB and pass rusher. It's why left tackles get drafted in the first round every year like clockwork. Teams don't like seeing their franchise quarterbacks getting killed. He can still probably play at his usual pro bowl level for a couple more years. If we're taking a qb either by trade or draft- a great blindside protector (like Thomas) is mandatory.

  • stillmotionS stillmotion wrote on last edited by
    #28

    maybe start with all the cap room jimmy has.....

    i'm worried about resigning pryor and collins next year. I'm willing to bet they both want the maximum, especially since pryors agent is rosenhaus. Is pryor really worth Julio Jones type money?

    worse case, we let both go, and have even more cap room. then "build through the draft". Looking at that, it'll take 3-5 years to get a quality team. Jimmy will probably stay 40 million under the cap each year, and if his plan goes accordingly, by year 4 or 5, we'll be in the playoffs and he'll be paying the minimum. At worst, if we don't hit on the next two drafts, we go 1-15 and then 3-13 in the respective years and then he cans everyone, of course, that's the worst case scenario. Best case scenario is that we draft some studs, sign some free agents, and don't overpay for some of the people that we have. T Pryor doesn't deserve 50 or 60 million dollars in a multi year deal...... But Ricardo Louis and Cam Erving aren't talented enough to be on an NFL football team. We've gotta find some kind of balance. Call the "strategy" what you want, but Jimmy's being a cheapass.

  • @calfoxwc said:

    I'm talking about drafting a star asskicking SS, ILB, DE, C, OG/OT, CB...

    and QB. and WR. and RB. and TE. and RT. and RG. and LG. and LT. and K. and P. and DL. and DL. and MLB. and OLB. and..............scouts that can evaluate talent. and GMs who aren't blind and dumb. and HCs that can find a way to win. and................

    flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on last edited by
    #29

    @miktoxic said:

    and QB. and WR. and RB. and TE. and RT. and RG. and LG. and LT. and K. and P. and DL. and DL. and MLB. and OLB. and..............scouts that can evaluate talent. and GMs who aren't blind and dumb. and HCs that can find a way to win. and................

    I really like the part about scouts that can evaluate talent.

  • @calfoxwc said:

    I'm talking about drafting a star asskicking SS, ILB, DE, C, OG/OT, CB...

    and QB. and WR. and RB. and TE. and RT. and RG. and LG. and LT. and K. and P. and DL. and DL. and MLB. and OLB. and..............scouts that can evaluate talent. and GMs who aren't blind and dumb. and HCs that can find a way to win. and................

    T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by
    #30

    @miktoxic said:

    and QB. and WR. and RB. and TE. and RT. and RG. and LG. and LT. and K. and P. and DL. and DL. and MLB. and OLB. and..............scouts that can evaluate talent. and GMs who aren't blind and dumb. and HCs that can find a way to win. and................

    Not to mention this newfangled machine. 😆

  • @miktoxic said:

    and QB. and WR. and RB. and TE. and RT. and RG. and LG. and LT. and K. and P. and DL. and DL. and MLB. and OLB. and..............scouts that can evaluate talent. and GMs who aren't blind and dumb. and HCs that can find a way to win. and................

    Not to mention this newfangled machine. 😆

    flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on last edited by
    #31

    @texasag1969 said:

    Not to mention this newfangled machine. 😆

    Our next QB?
  • jiggins7919J jiggins7919 wrote on last edited by
    #32

    The fact that both Cassell and Mallet haven't performed well isn't lost on me. If we trade for Garoppolo, it would DEFINITELY be scary, but no more worrisome than drafting Kizer, Mitch, or Watson, right? We obviously need a QB, but a part of me says that it doesn't matter who our QB is if we can't protect him or provide him with ANY kind of a running game. What would you guys think if we used our first four picks (2 first round, 2 second round) on strengthening OTHER parts of our team, and we didn't address QB at all? We go Garrett, CB, OL, OL. We then start Kessler, and use RG III or Josh as the backup. A part of me says I'd throw myself off a cliff, the other says, "Well, let's get our foundation more solid, and THEN get our QB."

    I don't know...I really just don't. We need so much.

  • The fact that both Cassell and Mallet haven't performed well isn't lost on me. If we trade for Garoppolo, it would DEFINITELY be scary, but no more worrisome than drafting Kizer, Mitch, or Watson, right? We obviously need a QB, but a part of me says that it doesn't matter who our QB is if we can't protect him or provide him with ANY kind of a running game. What would you guys think if we used our first four picks (2 first round, 2 second round) on strengthening OTHER parts of our team, and we didn't address QB at all? We go Garrett, CB, OL, OL. We then start Kessler, and use RG III or Josh as the backup. A part of me says I'd throw myself off a cliff, the other says, "Well, let's get our foundation more solid, and THEN get our QB."

    I don't know...I really just don't. We need so much.

    stillmotionS stillmotion wrote on last edited by
    #33

    @jiggins7919 said:

    The fact that both Cassell and Mallet haven't performed well isn't lost on me. If we trade for Garoppolo, it would DEFINITELY be scary, but no more worrisome than drafting Kizer, Mitch, or Watson, right? We obviously need a QB, but a part of me says that it doesn't matter who our QB is if we can't protect him or provide him with ANY kind of a running game. What would you guys think if we used our first four picks (2 first round, 2 second round) on strengthening OTHER parts of our team, and we didn't address QB at all? We go Garrett, CB, OL, OL. We then start Kessler, and use RG III or Josh as the backup. A part of me says I'd throw myself off a cliff, the other says, "Well, let's get our foundation more solid, and THEN get our QB."

    I don't know...I really just don't. We need so much.

    i'd gladly trade myles garrett for jimmy g, call me crazy but that's a QB you can build around.

  • maybe start with all the cap room jimmy has.....

    i'm worried about resigning pryor and collins next year. I'm willing to bet they both want the maximum, especially since pryors agent is rosenhaus. Is pryor really worth Julio Jones type money?

    worse case, we let both go, and have even more cap room. then "build through the draft". Looking at that, it'll take 3-5 years to get a quality team. Jimmy will probably stay 40 million under the cap each year, and if his plan goes accordingly, by year 4 or 5, we'll be in the playoffs and he'll be paying the minimum. At worst, if we don't hit on the next two drafts, we go 1-15 and then 3-13 in the respective years and then he cans everyone, of course, that's the worst case scenario. Best case scenario is that we draft some studs, sign some free agents, and don't overpay for some of the people that we have. T Pryor doesn't deserve 50 or 60 million dollars in a multi year deal...... But Ricardo Louis and Cam Erving aren't talented enough to be on an NFL football team. We've gotta find some kind of balance. Call the "strategy" what you want, but Jimmy's being a cheapass.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by
    #34

    @stillmotion said:

    maybe start with all the cap room jimmy has.....

    i'm worried about resigning pryor and collins next year. I'm willing to bet they both want the maximum, especially since pryors agent is rosenhaus. Is pryor really worth Julio Jones type money?

    Best case scenario is that we draft some studs, sign some free agents, and don't overpay for some of the people that we have. T Pryor doesn't deserve 50 or 60 million dollars in a multi year deal.....

    Jimmy's being a cheapass.

    First, I don't buy the "cheap-ass" bit... when the time comes, Jimmah will open his wallet for the team he'll put on the field. You just have to look at what he's paying players and coaches to no longer be here to see that... not to mention the stadium improvements he's funded.

    On the other hand I share your resign concerns... especially with Collins. Unless he's a total mercenary at heart, then I think he'll take less to go to a contender. It's just hard for me to see a former Patriot being satisfied to be part of a multi-year rebuild. On the other hand he may be one of those whose ego would embrace being a centerpiece of a rebuild.

    Pryor on the other hand... there are ways to pay potential to stick around. He's 17th in YPG, so he's on the cusp of joining the best in the game. In 2018 the 17th highest paid WR will pull down ~$8mm. A base in that area as the foundation of an incentive laden deal in its first years combined with back-end, mutual-option years, just might get it done. Including some extra-healthy guaranteed $$$ and injury insurance would also help. Then a $40mm-ish deal has $60mm potential if he turns out to be worth "it".

    But if all else fails the WSH route with Cousins is there... tag him. It overpays TP for another one-year look, but identifying his value is our reward.

    Finally... least we end on an agreeable high note... once you open the wallet for FAs, who are almost always "overpaid", then those with whom you bargained hard tend to say, "Hey! Where was mine?"

  • @babernakle said:

    Well there is no answer at qb in the draft the only guy out there is garoppolo and we have a good trading relationship with New England but the line needs addressed first and foremost otherwise there is no sense in getting a qb draft at center gaurd and tackle trade Thomas to the pats and a late round pick for garoppolo

    Two reasons why not Jimmy G. Mallett and Cassell. How did those two work out when they went to other teams? Belichick isn't going to trade his QBOTF with a soon to be 40 year old Tom Brady manning the position. Trade Jimmy and keep Jacoby Brissett? Bill's smart enough to know Tom isn't going to be playing forever. Of course, if he can sucker some team into giving up a first round pick, I'm sure he'll listen.

    The only reason we got Collins from the Pats is they didn't want to (or couldn't) come up with enough cash to keep him happy. The Browns have more cap room (by far) than any other team in the NFL. Bill has rarely let someone go who went on to excel with another team.

    If you know anything at all about relative value to a team, left tackle (that's Joe) ranks only behind QB and pass rusher. It's why left tackles get drafted in the first round every year like clockwork. Teams don't like seeing their franchise quarterbacks getting killed. He can still probably play at his usual pro bowl level for a couple more years. If we're taking a qb either by trade or draft- a great blindside protector (like Thomas) is mandatory.

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by
    #35

    @hoorta said:

    Two reasons why not Jimmy G. Mallett and Cassell. How did those two work out when they went to other teams? Belichick isn't going to trade his QBOTF with a soon to be 40 year old Tom Brady manning the position. Trade Jimmy and keep Jacoby Brissett? Bill's smart enough to know Tom isn't going to be playing forever. Of course, if he can sucker some team into giving up a first round pick, I'm sure he'll listen.

    The only reason we got Collins from the Pats is they didn't want to (or couldn't) come up with enough cash to keep him happy. The Browns have more cap room (by far) than any other team in the NFL. Bill has rarely let someone go who went on to excel with another team.

    If you know anything at all about relative value to a team, left tackle (that's Joe) ranks only behind QB and pass rusher. It's why left tackles get drafted in the first round every year like clockwork. Teams don't like seeing their franchise quarterbacks getting killed. He can still probably play at his usual pro bowl level for a couple more years. If we're taking a qb either by trade or draft- a great blindside protector (like Thomas) is mandatory.

    Last bit earned you a "+1".

    Collins isn't there because he was not "doing his job" and analytics said his production could be replaced. Likely not by one player, but his production could be replaced (think Moneyball scene where Billy is meeting with his scouts and trying to get them to "think right").

    As for Garoppolo... Bill B. would trade his son for the right price. Bill has created the market for his past back-ups. I think he's done it again.. in no small part with an assist from Goodell. Also bear in mind that 2017 is the last year of Jimmy's rookie deal... and Tom Terrific will play forever...

    @flyingfooldoug said:

    I really like the part about scouts that can evaluate talent.

    lol... yeah, that'd help.

    Really Sashi ought to just read this board. Someone here is right about every player. Of course that "someone" tends to vary from player to player. But the history is here to apply analytics and determine posters' "batting averages"...

    Could pay us by flying us on Jimmah's jet to join him in his owner's box... helluvalot cheaper than his scout payroll... and maybe with better results.

  • @stillmotion said:

    maybe start with all the cap room jimmy has.....

    i'm worried about resigning pryor and collins next year. I'm willing to bet they both want the maximum, especially since pryors agent is rosenhaus. Is pryor really worth Julio Jones type money?

    Best case scenario is that we draft some studs, sign some free agents, and don't overpay for some of the people that we have. T Pryor doesn't deserve 50 or 60 million dollars in a multi year deal.....

    Jimmy's being a cheapass.

    First, I don't buy the "cheap-ass" bit... when the time comes, Jimmah will open his wallet for the team he'll put on the field. You just have to look at what he's paying players and coaches to no longer be here to see that... not to mention the stadium improvements he's funded.

    On the other hand I share your resign concerns... especially with Collins. Unless he's a total mercenary at heart, then I think he'll take less to go to a contender. It's just hard for me to see a former Patriot being satisfied to be part of a multi-year rebuild. On the other hand he may be one of those whose ego would embrace being a centerpiece of a rebuild.

    Pryor on the other hand... there are ways to pay potential to stick around. He's 17th in YPG, so he's on the cusp of joining the best in the game. In 2018 the 17th highest paid WR will pull down ~$8mm. A base in that area as the foundation of an incentive laden deal in its first years combined with back-end, mutual-option years, just might get it done. Including some extra-healthy guaranteed $$$ and injury insurance would also help. Then a $40mm-ish deal has $60mm potential if he turns out to be worth "it".

    But if all else fails the WSH route with Cousins is there... tag him. It overpays TP for another one-year look, but identifying his value is our reward.

    Finally... least we end on an agreeable high note... once you open the wallet for FAs, who are almost always "overpaid", then those with whom you bargained hard tend to say, "Hey! Where was mine?"

    MudflyM Mudfly wrote on last edited by Mudfly
    #36

    @tour2ma said:

    On the other hand I share your resign concerns... especially with Collins. Unless he's a total mercenary at heart, then I think he'll take less to go to a contender. It's just hard for me to see a former Patriot being satisfied to be part of a multi-year rebuild. On the other hand he may be one of those whose ego would embrace being a centerpiece of a rebuild.

    I dont think Jimmah is cheap either.....in fact....I think he'd spend every penny if he knew we'd win....heck, he had the highest paid, yet worst, defense in the league.....just a year ago.....

    And....Im thinking Collins could easily be a mercenary.....in fact, dude doesnt even like football.....says he's not a fan and never has been.....just happens to be a good player....

    So, Im thinking he's a very unique character....one who doesnt care that much about wins, etc....but still always plays to win....

    I think we can sign him.....cause even when he loses, he still sleeps well......

  • @babernakle said:

    If you have watched the browns the past two years you know they suck. Many of the talking heads say they need a qb. Well that could be the dumbest thing I have ever heard. The problem is the O-line period. It's why they can't run the ball it's why our defense gets blasted especially in the second half and why we can't keep a qb. The genus of the front office to keep Joe Thomas is pathetic not trading him while he was worth something was stupid his play has diminished and should be gone along with the rest of the line get rid of them all and start new bring guys in the want to play and not looking for there last check before they retire. If you look at time of possession and if I was a defensive play I'd be whooping some o-line ass they are a pathetic bunch and should be ashamed to call themselves professionals

    The hilarious thing about the Browns is for a chunk of time there we had a pretty decent O-line and still managed to be appallingly mediocre to stunningly bad. No matter what asset we have we're missing the complimentary piece. We have no line, or no quarterback, or no receivers, or no defense. We've not had a running game to speak of since the Browns came into existence. It's hilarious, It's impossible to be as bad as the Browns have been and yet, here we are. Defying all the odds.

    E ElkDawg wrote on last edited by
    #37

    @the-cysko-kid said:

    The hilarious thing about the Browns is for a chunk of time there we had a pretty decent O-line and still managed to be appallingly mediocre to stunningly bad. No matter what asset we have we're missing the complimentary piece. We have no line, or no quarterback, or no receivers, or no defense. We've not had a running game to speak of since the Browns came into existence. It's hilarious, It's impossible to be as bad as the Browns have been and yet, here we are. Defying all the odds.

    In essence you're saying we suck?

  • @the-cysko-kid said:

    The hilarious thing about the Browns is for a chunk of time there we had a pretty decent O-line and still managed to be appallingly mediocre to stunningly bad. No matter what asset we have we're missing the complimentary piece. We have no line, or no quarterback, or no receivers, or no defense. We've not had a running game to speak of since the Browns came into existence. It's hilarious, It's impossible to be as bad as the Browns have been and yet, here we are. Defying all the odds.

    In essence you're saying we suck?

    T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by TexasAg1969
    #38

    @elkdawg said:

    In essence you're saying we suck?

    In essence we are the '76 Bucs & the 2008 Lions. Eerily similar to what I read here almost every week.

    "The Lions had plenty of chances to win at least one game during the 2008 NFL season. Although they suffered their fair share of blowouts throughout the year, they also lost four games by a touchdown or less. So they very easily could have finished 1-15, 2-14, or even 3-13. But they didn't. They finished 0-16, and their season was summed up perfectly by their radio play-by-play announcer Dan Miller after they lost their 16th game of the season to the Green Bay Packers. "For 16 weeks, starting in Atlanta back in September, they took the field thinking this was gonna be their day," he said. "Sixteen times they were wrong...They are the worst team in league history."

  • Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on last edited by Tour2ma
    #39

    Nah... we're a different kind of suck... at least from the Lions as I remember it...

    Remember how they were a playmaking WR away from contention like three years running? At least that's what Millen thought. Took like three WRs with very high picks in three consecutive drafts until they hit on Megatron.

    Whereas our FO traded down and then exhausted their WR lust in one draft!.

    Vive la difference!

  • Nah... we're a different kind of suck... at least from the Lions as I remember it...

    Remember how they were a playmaking WR away from contention like three years running? At least that's what Millen thought. Took like three WRs with very high picks in three consecutive drafts until they hit on Megatron.

    Whereas our FO traded down and then exhausted their WR lust in one draft!.

    Vive la difference!

    hoortaH hoorta wrote on last edited by
    #40

    @tour2ma said:

    Nah... we're a different kind of suck... at least from the Lions as I remember it...

    Remember how they were a playmaking WR away from contention like three years running? At least that's what Millen thought. Took like three WRs with very high picks in three consecutive drafts until they hit on Megatron.

    Whereas our FO traded down and then exhausted their WR lust in one draft!.

    Vive la difference!

    Not that much different Tour. Millen belongs in the draft Hall of Shame, but Farmer isn't far behind. I'm on my tablet, so I'm not going to look up which Bozo drafted Joey Harrington.

  • Nah... we're a different kind of suck... at least from the Lions as I remember it...

    Remember how they were a playmaking WR away from contention like three years running? At least that's what Millen thought. Took like three WRs with very high picks in three consecutive drafts until they hit on Megatron.

    Whereas our FO traded down and then exhausted their WR lust in one draft!.

    Vive la difference!

    T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by
    #41

    @tour2ma said:

    Nah... we're a different kind of suck... at least from the Lions as I remember it...

    Remember how they were a playmaking WR away from contention like three years running? At least that's what Millen thought. Took like three WRs with very high picks in three consecutive drafts until they hit on Megatron.

    Whereas our FO traded down and then exhausted their WR lust in one draft!.

    Vive la difference!

    Give us time. That lust may not be done yet. 😛